The inhabitants of Djade al-Mughara lived off hunting and wild plants. They resembled modern day humans in looks but were not farmers or
domesticated

I dont see how the people who lived in this village were hunter/gatherer types.
Surely a hunter/gatherer tribe would not bother to build a village with stone walls and decorative art.
I think these people would have had domesticated animals goats, chickens etc
as well as basic grain crops of wild wheat.
Unless they had built more villages and traveled between them seasonally

"French archaeologists have discovered an 11,000-year-old wall painting underground in NORTHERN SYRIA which they believe is the oldest in the
world.

FRANCE is an important contributor to excavation efforts in SYRIA, where 120 TEAMS ARE AT WORK. Syria was at the crossroads of the ancient world and
has thousands of mostly unexcavated archaeological sites.

Now tell me ... what do you think they are looking for ? And why do you think the ONU/USA/FRANCE etc... are in Syria ?

Ah, the French have doing archaeology in Syria since the 19th century, bolstered somewhat by a short stint as the colonial overlords. In the earlier
time there was a great deal of competition between them and archaeologists from England and later Germany.

Are you supposing that the French under Napoleon invaded Egypt in 1798 and Syria in 1799, which led to an increased interest in archaeology and
therefore to two centuries of archaeological research in the area so they could spy on Syria in 2012?

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
Hans are you single-handedly trying to recruit a new generation of archeologists? Anyhow another great post, this area in particular just seems to
have an endless supply of fascinating ancient sites.

We always need a fresh supply of bodies! When I've queried students on this I find that about 65%* come to archaeology from an initial interest in
fringe subject, they come looking for answers, just like people who are nuts and want to understand themselves, become psychologists, lol

*edited to add; this would apply to US students, 80% for European, 20% for Asian, and 0.05% for Arab students

Well you say that, but bronze making does too, and it also meant travelling thousands of miles to get the tin necessary to get the required
result...so as I was saying...

Copper is easier to melt that iron and doesn't require carbon infusions to make it 'better'

Certainly. The truth of the matter being, as you demonstrate, that the early metal workers needed to first perfect the art, via bronze smelting, in
order to have the technical expertise to move onto working iron.

The inhabitants of Djade al-Mughara lived off hunting and wild plants. They resembled modern day humans in looks but were not farmers or
domesticated

I dont see how the people who lived in this village were hunter/gatherer types.
Surely a hunter/gatherer tribe would not bother to build a village with stone walls and decorative art.
I think these people would have had domesticated animals goats, chickens etc
as well as basic grain crops of wild wheat.

It would depend upon the size of the group. The size of the group would then depend upon how many children and infants it could support. And what
predators they needed to defend those children from. At some point the roles of men and women polarised, and men went off, seasonally, to hunt, and
left the women, with stores, to raise the children. It was as likely that those left behind would have needed to defend themselves from other humans,
as well as from other mammalian predators.

I know the abouriginals in australia needed about two hours a day to take care of all the hunter gathering, the rest is time to do what ever.

building permanent structures takes more time..

if they had hunting and fishing and they probably did, and not much of a winter they would have had it soft
they may have sent out hunting parties but would not have travelled much..comparable to maybe the hohokem or the anastasi types in NA...the river
likely was the hiway

Originally posted by Danbones
I know the abouriginals in australia needed about two hours a day to take care of all the hunter gathering, the rest is time to do what ever.

building permanent structures takes more time..

It takes more time, but then usually, once it is done...well it is permanent. So a one-off (assuming the techniques are sound) venture, that will
last longer than the temporary seasonal structures. And, once you have invested that time, then you are hard-pressed to leave it.

The utility of temporary shelters ofcourse far outweigh permanent ones. You are less likely to be a victim of natural disasters, they are heathier,
and you are less likely to deplete the local fertility. But, you know, we as a species seem to prefer the familiar, not to mention the fact that we
have a very possessive nature.

yeah, if you don't have pressure why move?
but say the weather pattern changes then everything changes or a rampant social group invades then maybe they would head for the hills...pemanent
structure indicates a knowledge base a little bigger then a nomad might need and so does the artwork

re Iron they may have meteorite iron, copper, a couple of shared tools could make the whole village..
If you catch big animals in the streamside mud a small wooden pithing stick between the vertebre is enough to kill a big animal

yeah, if you don't have pressure why move?
but say the weather pattern changes then everything changes or a rampant social group invades then maybe they would head for the hills...pemanent
structure indicates a knowledge base a little bigger then a nomad might need and so does the artwork

It is all very gradual. And we know that climatic change pushed groups of hominids together in the Middle East from time to time. The art work in
the caves in France and Spain is 30,000 years old in some places, and highly stylised. Those caves must have served at times as permanent residences,
particularly during nuclear winters for example. The early settlements can be equated to constructing caves where there were no caves in some senses.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.